First off... let me state that I enjoyed Rogue One immensely and thought it infinitely superior to The Force Awakens (the weakest Star Wars film IMHO). It was everything The Force Awakens SHOULD have been.However, I do have some significant nitpicks, which whilst they don't ruin the film for me, lessen it somewhat...

1) Krennic appeared to be a very undeveloped villain. His character was perhaps a victim of the reshoots, but I never really got a sense of his motives/motivation. Because of that factor, the film lacked an antagonist centre. Krennic probably would have benefitted for less Tarkin.

2) Tarkin - Whilst I got genuine SW geek chills from seeing Tarkin again, I thought him too obviously digital. I'm not sure, as an effect, it will age well. I'd have preferred Tarkin to not appear at all (given he was a peripheral figure)... and what was with his sudden spurt of growth? Peter Cushing was circa 5ft 10/11... but now he appears to be circa 6ft 4 inches.

3) As others have mentioned, ANH alludes to Vader hunting down rebel spies, whereas Rogue One positions him more as a peripheral character who just turns up at the end... and as others have mentioned, it creates a bit of a continuity problem given Princess Leia's defence in ANH, and Rogue One's depiction of her being in the thick of it in the finale. I believe this was a consequence of the film wanting to tie everything up in a bow (IMO). No need for the Tantive IV. No need for Leia's appearance. It just made the ending feel too convoluted.

4) The score. Whilst it was perfectly adequate, it was perfunctory at best. Opting for an orchestral score only served to highlight the shortfall in R1's score and that of any Williams penned one.

The main things I liked...

1) A return to the more world building Lucas'esque vibe. Even though this was much closer to events of ANH, Edwards seemed more willing to mix the aesthetic, give us new worlds, ships etc.

2) A genuine sense of peril. A sense of narrative progression. The final reel made it feel like there was something genuinely at stake for the characters. And although ostensibly shorthand, the characters largely behaved in ways that were logical and believable. After the lack of peril/tension and narrative cohesion in a The Force Awakens, I was pleasantly surprised regarding this element of Rogue One.

3) R1 is a SW film I immediately wanted to see again. Not felt that way since 2005.

I honestly think this film had some of the best battles in series history. The ground/beach battle to be tops the Battle of Hoth while the space battle is second only to The Battle of Endor. I absolutely loved how much of a war film this was. So brilliant.

The way this was shot really, really makes me hope we get a Battle of Jakku film.

Saw it this morning for the first time. I didn't hate it but I didn't like it. I enjoyed the tarkin effects but thought red leader and gold leader looked silly. I know it was a good movie but it didn't really add anything to Star Wars for me. That said I can see where other fans might love it and it's nice to hear all the positives. Hey my son is watching a new hope right now holding a Darth Vader figure telling rebels to die so it must have worked.

I think I'm with the consensus that Rogue One is a better movie than TFA but it leaned on nostalgia and fan service a bit too much for my tastes. These references and call backs could have been handled with more finesse by a more subtle director but will likely make for a fun drinking game when the movie comes home: take a shot every time some says the word "hope."

CG Tarkin was very convincing and I feel like we're on the precipice of a digital actor revolution where totally unique human actors will be created (probably copyrighted) and cast in films alongside "real" actors and no one will think twice about their use (think the Al Pacino movie "Simone" from a few years back).

I honestly think this film had some of the best battles in series history. The ground/beach battle to be tops the Battle of Hoth while the space battle is second only to The Battle of Endor. I absolutely loved how much of a war film this was. So brilliant.

The way this was shot really, really makes me hope we get a Battle of Jakku film.

That particular battle on the beach lacked a bit of scale for me... which was surprising given there were imperial walkers and special forces storm troopers involved. I still enjoyed it, but it was a pity the rebels didn't have the same guns and ships for the battle of Hoth... because the walkers seemed to be easily defeated in R1.

Some of the character motivations aren't fleshed out enough. Jyn is supposed to be the reluctant hero but she's never properly established as being disillusioned with the rebel cause or her place in the world. We go from her being in jail, to her being rescued, to her joining this mission without any fuss. There needed to be more set up of a despondent maybe even suicidal Jyn for the rest of her arc to fully pay off. She also becomes too much of a leader too quickly following Galen's death. We needed a scene or two before her speech to the Alliance Council, possibly channeling her grief into something more constructive to honour her father, for that to jive properly. That would make her last scene resonate more too when Cassian tells her that her father would be proud of her.

I suspect that Jyn's sharp turn as a leader is a product of rewrites / re-shoots. It's believable enough. But, I agree it could have been handled a lot better.

Overall, I wish I could have seen a few more of Adnor's "terrible things" or his back story in general. Also, Saw Gerrera and his band of extremist rebels blows my mind a little. What have those guys been up to? Hopefully, Rebels attempts to fill in some of the blanks left by the movie.

CoGro wrote:

The ending: for a script that was so clever at making ANH a better movie by explaining the weakness in the Death Star and investing us further in the plight of the Rebellion, I was shocked by the filmmakers' decision to have the Tantive present at the Scarif battle and for Vader to witness its escape with the plans first hand. It literally transforms Antilles' and Leia's story from being a "believable" cover to a completely laughable lie. They were literally caught with their hand in the cookie jar, chewing on cookies, with cookie crumbs on their faces and saying they didn't do it. That really changes the opening scene of ANH for the worse in my view, and makes some of the dialogue feel odd.

In ANH, Vader may not recognize Tantive IV as the exact same ship from Rogue One.

He'd have to be an idiot not to recognise it's the same ship... given it's a lingering shot of him watching the Tantive IV escape and then, we assume, he pursues directly in the Devastator, and we're into ANH.

The ending: for a script that was so clever at making ANH a better movie by explaining the weakness in the Death Star and investing us further in the plight of the Rebellion, I was shocked by the filmmakers' decision to have the Tantive present at the Scarif battle and for Vader to witness its escape with the plans first hand. It literally transforms Antilles' and Leia's story from being a "believable" cover to a completely laughable lie. They were literally caught with their hand in the cookie jar, chewing on cookies, with cookie crumbs on their faces and saying they didn't do it. That really changes the opening scene of ANH for the worse in my view, and makes some of the dialogue feel odd.

Leia and her crew are not watching Vader watch them escape. We are watching Vader watch them escape. Leia and Capt. Antilles lies are still as justifiable as they've always been.

Quote:

"I have traced the rebel spies to her, now she is my only link to finding their secret base." -- you weren't really tracing rebels spies at all; you intercepted a rebel cruiser while it was fleeing battle, cut down rebel soldiers who were playing pass the baton with the stolen plans, and watched the very ship you captured flee. There was never any direct link between Leia and the spies. Further to that, the search for the rebel base was never a plot point in this film but definitely should have been considering its importance in ANH. The very characters who seem obsessed with finding it in ANH say nothing of it in Rogue One.

The events of Rogue One are why the Empire is now hot to find the Rebels hidden base. Vader may have traced the Rebel spies to Leia while en route to follow her ship. By "tracing," he could simply mean that he has connected the dots - Leia is a part of the Rebel Alliance. He hadn't made that connection before the end of Rogue One.

Leia and her crew are not watching Vader watch them escape. We are watching Vader watch them escape. Leia and Capt. Antilles lies are still as justifiable as they've always been.

That part I buy, I just don't like how there's no more plausible deniability from Leia. They clearly know that Vader was inches away from boarding the Tantive - he was cutting rebels down in the airlock moments before they broke away.

I guess I'm more hung up on why Leia is at the battle in the first place. Pretty massive risk to put such an important dignitary and Imperial Senator (who's supposed to be able to keep up appearances in the Senate that she's not a rebel) in harms way.

Bandersnatch wrote:

The events of Rogue One are why the Empire is now hot to find the Rebels hidden base. Vader may have traced the Rebel spies to Leia while en route to follow her ship. By "tracing," he could simply mean that he has connected the dots - Leia is a part of the Rebel Alliance. He hadn't made that connection before the end of Rogue One.

Yep - I buy that.

The other minor nit is that clearly the Death Star is operational prior to ANH even though there's constant talk in ANH that it isn't yet ready. I know it hadn't destroyed an entire planet yet but still.

Yup - if only they'd been savvy enough to use the weaponary that had worked before...

Bandersnatch wrote:

Is ESB, the X and Y-Wings were busy escorting the Rebel fleet, leaving the ground troops and snowspeeders to engage and perhaps distract the AT-ATs.

Also, those are not AT-ATs on Scarif. They are an earlier less powerful model.

Firstly, why would the rebels not utilise the ships that have history of downing walkers? It's just the writers way of having their cake and eating it.

Secondly, nowhere in the films does it state that the imperial walkers in TESB have heavier armour than their predesesors. Whilst of course that's quite possible within the SW fictional world, any gap in logic or any inconsistency can be explained away with that wave of hand, but ultimately it's bad writing, IMO, just like the continuity issue created by the Tantive IV at the end.

Yup - if only they'd been savvy enough to use the weaponary that had worked before...

Bandersnatch wrote:

Is ESB, the X and Y-Wings were busy escorting the Rebel fleet, leaving the ground troops and snowspeeders to engage and perhaps distract the AT-ATs.

Also, those are not AT-ATs on Scarif. They are an earlier less powerful model.

Doctor When wrote:

Firstly, why would the rebels not utilise the ships that have history of downing walkers? It's just the writers way of having their cake and eating it.

Secondly, nowhere in the films does it state that the imperial walkers in TESB have heavier armour than their predesesors. Whilst of course that's quite possible within the SW fictional world, any gap in logic or any inconsistency can be explained away with that wave of hand, but ultimately it's bad writing, IMO, just like the continuity issue created by the Tantive IV at the end.

I'm pretty sure AT-ATs got a massive upgrade. They do look different. Maybe wait for the novelization of Rogue One. This was a massive moment - the first true assault on the Empire and where the Rebels showed their hand.

Perhaps the AT-ATs in TESB are built more for the conditions in Hoth. I dunno. Didn't bother me too much.

Yup - if only they'd been savvy enough to use the weaponary that had worked before...

Bandersnatch wrote:

Is ESB, the X and Y-Wings were busy escorting the Rebel fleet, leaving the ground troops and snowspeeders to engage and perhaps distract the AT-ATs.Also, those are not AT-ATs on Scarif. They are an earlier less powerful model.

Doctor When wrote:

Firstly, why would the rebels not utilise the ships that have history of downing walkers? It's just the writers way of having their cake and eating it.

Secondly, nowhere in the films does it state that the imperial walkers in TESB have heavier armour than their predesesors. Whilst of course that's quite possible within the SW fictional world, any gap in logic or any inconsistency can be explained away with that wave of hand, but ultimately it's bad writing, IMO, just like the continuity issue created by the Tantive IV at the end.

prox wrote:

I'm pretty sure AT-ATs got a massive upgrade. They do look different. Maybe wait for the novelization of Rogue One. This was a massive moment - the first true assault on the Empire and where the Rebels showed their hand.

Perhaps the AT-ATs in TESB are built more for the conditions in Hoth. I dunno. Didn't bother me too much.

I'm not really into the notion of having to use supplimentary material to explain the logic of something, but yes, I'm sure we can surmise they were upgraded down the years.. but it's not like the cinematic universe of Star Wars ever depicted x-wings and y-wings as being ubber fighters with collosal firepower at the time of the OT. If anything, they were depicted as old spaceships that were past their prime. Hence my surprise that they could so easily defeat walkers (not even counting the walker that was toppled by a someone firing a hand held laser rifle).

What I meant was, the X-Wings were already starting to escort the Rebel transports. The AT-AT attack hadn't happened yet.

Yep - there are several x-wings on the surface of Hoth after the shield generator has been destroyed... which indicates they could have taken part in the defence of the rebel base. The point is, Lucas never needed to depict x-wings and y-wings attacking the walkers because it was implicit that they'd be no more effective than a snowspeeder (which could at least trip them up). It's only really after the scene in Rogue One that the question arises "why didn't they just use x and y-wings against the walkers on Hoth if they are so easy to destroy?".

Yes - we can say "but the walkers on Scariff were less advanced and had weaker armour, which rebel ships (and hand held blasters) could penetrate/destroy". But, IMO, that can then be used to excuse any backwards engineering of already established logic. Ultimately, I believe the only reason we saw rebel ships destroying walkers, was not because of any internal logic they were establishing down to depict the evolution of imperial weaponry, but simply because it looked cool... and looking cool is more important than adhering to in-universe continuity (similar to the other examples I cited re. 6ft 4 inches Tarkin and Vader seeing the Tantive IV).

Now as stated in my original post, these aren't nearly big enough issues to ruin the film for me, I enjoyed it, but this economy of internal logic and liberal adherence to continuity does prevent R1 from being a better film and fulfilling its potential. This is of course just my opinion. I fully accept that others will love it despite/in-spite of these things...

What I meant was, the X-Wings were already starting to escort the Rebel transports. The AT-AT attack hadn't happened yet.

Doctor When wrote:

Yep - there are several x-wings on the surface of Hoth after the shield generator has been destroyed... which indicates they could have taken part in the defence of the rebel base. The point is, Lucas never needed to depict x-wings and y-wings attacking the walkers because it was implicit that they'd be no more effective than a snowspeeder (which could at least trip them up). It's only really after the scene in Rogue One that the question arises "why didn't they just use x and y-wings against the walkers on Hoth if they are so easy to destroy?".

Yes - we can say "but the walkers on Scariff were less advanced and had weaker armour, which rebel ships (and hand held blasters) could penetrate/destroy". But, IMO, that can then be used to excuse any backwards engineering of already established logic. Ultimately, I believe the only reason we saw rebel ships destroying walkers, was not because of any internal logic they were establishing down to depict the evolution of imperial weaponry, but simply because it looked cool... and looking cool is more important than adhering to in-universe continuity (similar to the other examples I cited re. 6ft 4 inches Tarkin and Vader seeing the Tantive IV).

Now as stated in my original post, these aren't nearly big enough issues to ruin the film for me, I enjoyed it, but this economy of internal logic and liberal adherence to continuity does prevent R1 from being a better film and fulfilling its potential. This is of course just my opinion. I fully accept that others will love it despite/in-spite of these things...

I think it's something that needs to be explained though. Why were the speeders used on Hoth instead of X-wings. Could it have something to do with the Hoth climate? And why would the Empire keep using Walkers that can be destroyed so easily by X-wings? Maybe The Rebels genuinely thought the speeders could take down AT-ATs? It would explain Luke's shock, declaring "that armour's too strong for blasters."

What I meant was, the X-Wings were already starting to escort the Rebel transports. The AT-AT attack hadn't happened yet.

Doctor When wrote:

Yep - there are several x-wings on the surface of Hoth after the shield generator has been destroyed... which indicates they could have taken part in the defence of the rebel base. The point is, Lucas never needed to depict x-wings and y-wings attacking the walkers because it was implicit that they'd be no more effective than a snowspeeder (which could at least trip them up). It's only really after the scene in Rogue One that the question arises "why didn't they just use x and y-wings against the walkers on Hoth if they are so easy to destroy?".

Yes - we can say "but the walkers on Scariff were less advanced and had weaker armour, which rebel ships (and hand held blasters) could penetrate/destroy". But, IMO, that can then be used to excuse any backwards engineering of already established logic. Ultimately, I believe the only reason we saw rebel ships destroying walkers, was not because of any internal logic they were establishing down to depict the evolution of imperial weaponry, but simply because it looked cool... and looking cool is more important than adhering to in-universe continuity (similar to the other examples I cited re. 6ft 4 inches Tarkin and Vader seeing the Tantive IV).

Now as stated in my original post, these aren't nearly big enough issues to ruin the film for me, I enjoyed it, but this economy of internal logic and liberal adherence to continuity does prevent R1 from being a better film and fulfilling its potential. This is of course just my opinion. I fully accept that others will love it despite/in-spite of these things...

prox wrote:

I think it's something that needs to be explained though. Why were the speeders used on Hoth instead of X-wings. Could it have something to do with the Hoth climate? And why would the Empire keep using Walkers that can be destroyed so easily by X-wings? Maybe The Rebels genuinely thought the speeders could take down AT-ATs? It would explain Luke's shock, declaring "that armour's too strong for blasters."

Anyway, I believe we will be getting an answer in some capacity.

I think it's a natural consequence when the filmmakers start using/re-using characters, situations, events etc. etc. They start to inavertadly dick about with continuity. In this instance it doesn't need to be explained as such because, for the vast majority of the audience, they just want to be entertained regardless. However, I do think it represents the challenge of creating multiple films within a similar timeline.

Continuity becomes so muddled that they just end up wanting to draw a line through it and then, ultimately, they reboot the universe from the ground up a la Star Trek, Batman etc. It's one of the reasons why I'd much rather have new Star Wars films set 100's of years before/after the OT/PT. It allows for much freeer and unrestricted storytelling without nesersarily undermining the existing films. But that's just my 2 cents...

I guess I'm the only one who found Forest Whitaker's work cringeworthy? Somehow I couldn't find any bitter extremist in him, just an overacting one.

About the music: surprisingly, it works better for me on its own, without the movie. Still, pieces like "Krennic's Aspirations", heavily relying on Williams' genius, are just the best. And while I listen to this soundtrack, I keep thinking about "A New Hope" and rumors that circulated years ago: are they going to rescore it, using Imperial March and other pieces composed later, to make it fit better between R1 and TESB?

Generally, I enjoyed the movie and certain moments were absolutely great (Vader vs rebel soldiers). If I were to change anything, I'd probably simplify the first, slower part. Maybe one trip less - Eadu mission could be joined with Scarif, I guess, to make the whole plot a bit tighter.

Oh, and I heard two identical opinions from female viewers (my wife included) that went like this: "You know, that Cassian character was... kinda wimpy" .

I was asking that question back in 1980, and again the best thing I've ever been able to come up with is that the X-Wings were preoccupied. Yes, we see some on the ground after the AT-AT attack as Luke boards his X-Wing, and we see a transport flanked by two X-Wings in the background taking off as Luke tells R2 to get ready. But that just means the entire fleet hadn't blasted off yet.

If the only visual effects produced were those that were unmistakably photo-real, there'd be no Star Wars. The property has always been a testing ground for visual effects innovations, perfected or not. I found this particular experiment an awesome stepping stone and I bet it challenges other VFX houses to do 'em one better. I, for one, applaud minds like John Knoll's.

Oh, women . After short interrogation it turned out it's physical: they just didn't like Cassian's skinny, boyish appearance. Which is of course a matter of taste, not a serious criticism of the character.

Join: January 22nd 2004 10:02 pmPosts: 1025Location: south of Mars and north of Hell

Surprisingly great! I say surprising because I really wasn't sure what to expect from this movie. Aside from the Vader teases the trailers left me feeling rather indifferent. I was a little worried the darker, grittier look and tone might make it feel less Star Wars or too detached from the other films stylistically. As the opening scene unfolded it still took a bit time to adjust to the different style. Of course that feeling fell by the wayside once things started rolling and we were jumping from one planet to the next on Jyn's journey. After that I was all in and totally engrossed.

I don't have many criticisms other than what has already been discussed.

I agree with the nitpicks about Vader's suit and voice. I thought they had the modulation sounding pretty good in RotS and even Rebels. I guess they could have tweaked it a bit further but regardless it was awesome to hear JEJ as Vader again. There were only two Vader scenes but they were both very satisfying and seeing him mow down those rebels was unforgettable.

Vader's castle on Mustafar - cool! Psychologically you gotta wonder why Vader would choose to reside on the same planet where he was defeated by Obi-Wan, burned to a crisp and to his knowledge the place where he killed his wife. Perhaps it fuels his hatred.

I thought all the cameos worked pretty well. Artoo and Threepio were the only one that felt a bit forced to me. Does Dr.Evazan just travel around the galaxy looking to start shit with everybody? lol

A little detail I liked was that the Stormtroopers had the voice click sound like in ANH.

I wasn't expecting Tarkin to have such a large role as he did. All things considered I think they did a pretty convincing job with the digital face replacement. They've come a long way from the digital double work that first appeared in AOTC and ROTS which even back then were not that great.

Regarding the Tantive IV issue, it might have worked better if it had been a different ship that escaped from Vader with the plans and then shown a shot of that ship later rendezvous with the Tantive to bridge together with the final scene of the disk being delivered to Leia.

Naturally, I can't wait to see it again!

Much Softer wrote:

Thanks, guys.And what about the rumoured prequel connections? (Besides Bail and Mon Mothma.)

Duke wrote:

At least I didn't recognise any other connections to the Prequels. But there were two connections to the Rebels:- First time we see the Yavin IV base General Syndulla is hailed twice by the com system.- Ghost is with the Rebel Fleet. I think it was shown also twice.

Another connection to the ANH is criminal duo from the Cantina scene.

I don't recall for sure but wasn't there one of those turbo tanks with the huge wheels from the RotS Kashyyyk battle in the establishing shot of the Imperial prison facility? Would be another prequel connection.

The Vader scene at the end is one of the most satisfying scenes I have ever watched in any movie. My thought coming out of the film was that I need a standalone Darth Vader movie.

Some would argue we have 6 of those films already. But I get what you're saying.

A movie featuring Obi-Wan set between ROTS and ANH is a popular idea (my personal favorite). Is there any reason such a movie couldn't also be a Darth Vader movie? Parallel Obi-Wan's story with Vader's learning his new identity while rising through the ranks of the fledgling Empire? A film like that could nicely bookend Rogue One.

A staple of Star Wars movies (RO included) is the telling of simultaneous parallel stories. While Vader is executing the famed Jedi Purge, the other story is Obi-Wan dealing with his shame and guilt while finding solace on Tatooine. A movie like that would satisfy the action a film needs to be popular, while also serving as a deep character examination. For example, a Boba Fett movie was shelved. What if story threads of that film were woven into the Han Solo movie? Having Boba Fett as a major presence in the Han Solo movie provides a natural antagonist to our hero, while also allowing Fett's story to be told within the film. Knock out two birds with one stone.

Rogue One did a terrific job of establishing the Empire as a constant and oppressive presence throughout the galaxy. By that time, all the kinks had been worked out of its machinations. A Vader/Obi-Wan film could show the early stages of those machinations, while we alternately cut to a quieter environment. No stand-alone SW film would ever be as compelling to me as a Vader/Obi-Wan film, since those are, by far, the two most fascinating characters in the saga to me.

Secondly, nowhere in the films does it state that the imperial walkers in TESB have heavier armour than their predesesors. Whilst of course that's quite possible within the SW fictional world, any gap in logic or any inconsistency can be explained away with that wave of hand, but ultimately it's bad writing, IMO, just like the continuity issue created by the Tantive IV at the end.

Not singling out your post, but it was the one handiest to quote.

I'm kind of astonished at the fans talking about weak AT-ATs. They weren't AT-ATs! They're AT-ACTs - container carrying versions. Their sides are bright orange, less guns, and yes, less armour. They're taller too - bigger stride, but more 'spindly'.

So, the walker stuff is easily explained. Also, as regards the Tantive IV, there are many red livery Corellian corvettes. If she used a different transponder, as the Falcon does for different name ID, problem solved.

I waited until after a second viewing to post my thoughts on this film so here it goes - the good, the bad and the ugly:

The good:

- Great cinematography- Nice use of cameos and references and such to tie the PT to the OT- I thought the VFX used for Leia and Tarkin was fine - bring on Alec Guinness (you know it's coming)- A good story worth telling - glad it is canon.- Vader's scenes- K-2SO

The Bad:

- Dialogue - The worst in relation to the characters, any one of these characters could have used the others lines and it would not have mattered. In the past all characters were defined by their iconic look and their dialogue to help establish the character’s personality, this was not "wooden" dialogue, just bland and too intricate for a SW Movie (which are modeled after silent films). I never connected with these characters except for K-2SO, his lines helped develop his character and gave him personality.

- Locations - A lot of them. It became confusing and made the film choppy. Did anyone notice every location was named/subtitled except Mustafar. Why? To surprise us? To me this was too on the nose as if to be telling us "surprise, here is a cool good part of the movie".

- Tension - I really felt like there was none, except for the third act. I can understand the need for the rewrites and reshoots as of now. The evidence of shots from the trailers missing in the actual film tells me this.

- Music - While good, it was not great, this is not MG's fault as he was rushed to take this project on. Great compositions, just not "scored to the film" well. All SW films has music that flows with the story, not here, seems slapped on. The reuse of OT riffs help gloss over and hide this issue somewhat.

The Ugly:

- I cannot see how anyone can rate this film above any of the past seven films. While it's "good'. The crafting of the film is out of line with the other film's style and rhythm (and I don't mean the shaky cam cinematography or gritty look). I-VII are operatic and so musically oriented that you can watch them over and over like listening to a good album.

- This feels like a pre-legends, expanded universe novel made into a film with a few "connect the dots PT/OT references for nostalgia and fan giddiness' sake". It's just flat and cold like most of those novels were post Zahn's Thawn trilogy.

- This is a SW story made into a movie - not a great film that tells a story. What I mean is... Lucas, Ben Burt, Joe Johnston, John Williams, J.J Abrams, etc - these are great filmmakers who understood the CRAFT of filmmaking to tell a great cinematic story. To me this is where RO stands apart from what has come before and it shows. I am not knocking Gareth Edwards. I see him as a filmmakerhired to tell a story as opposed to making a great film to serve the story. Maybe this is the beginning of the corporate SW franchise?

- If not for the last 5 minutes with the Vader rampage and the Tantive IV I think people would have left feeling underwhelmed. It would be like a great student film on the technical side with no emotional connection/resonance with the audience. So... he/she uses a pre-established, famous song during the end scene and credits to do it for him, thus ending on a high note and big applause.

- Lastly, I was more excited for this film than TFA. However, the way I see the writing on the wall thus far since the mouse gained control of LF is the emergence of many dents in the armor of a corporate run franchise banking on hitting "spots" of nostalgia in their own SW productions to get by.

In the past we had great filmmakers who knew what worked and what didn't, as well as how and how not to tell a great story cinematically. This was still apparent in TCW animated series (can’t say the same for Rebels), in which I never felt I had to sit through to catch the "nostalgic spots" referencing the PT/ST. I love Rex, Cad Bane and Ahsoka more so than some of the film characters. I had an emotional investment with them. While not an original story, JJ's TFA managed to get me totally invested in those new characters more than RO did with it's own new characters.

We often hear of the "Story Group" at Lucasfilm. While I admire and respect their role in maintaining the franchise, it did not become successful because of story alone nor some type of pop culture savy managers. It was the result of great filmmakers who loved film, each with their own part to play (in a pre-social media era when communication skills were much sharper and dynamic as opposed to today, but that is another topic for another day). Star Wars was a creation of cinema, not narrative alone. In some ways, it is the opposite of Tolkien and the LOTR/Hobbit, which were great literary works adapted into films by a great filmmaker. SW is great filmmaking that produced the best cinema and then some other good media to match.

My fear going forward is we may be living in a phase of nostalgic moments and recycled/rehash that can only last for so long. Rebels’ season 2 Finale with Vader, Maul and Ahsoka has been the only exception thus far since Disney ran the show – Dave Filoni’s work took us to an original place and pushed the story forward emotionally and cinematically. This guy is the future of the franchise - he gets it for what it is, the craft, not because of what he knows about all aspects of SW media or history.

My hope is those at Disney/LF will catch on and course correct the franchise quietly and soon before it becomes more apparent to the die-hard base and the mainstream audience.

To be fair, we have more than 30 years of Lucas-led LFL history to reflect upon. The modern-era LFL to me, really started in the spring of 2014 with the announcement of the EU reset and the beginning of the filming of TFA. It's also permissible to equally appreciate both eras.